Allahabad High Court
SAURABH @ GOLAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The court held that the accused is not entitled to bail because the injury caused to the victim was grievous, resulting in loss of vision.
Summary
The applicant, Saurabh @ Gola, filed a bail application in a criminal case (Crime No. 77 of 2026) under Section 117(3) of the B.N.S., alleging false implication in an assault where the victim was struck on the head with a brick, resulting in loss of vision. He contended that he had no specific role assigned in the FIR, possessed no prior criminal record, and had been in custody since 12 March 2026, thus deserving bail during trial. The State opposed bail, presenting a medical report indicating that the victim had indeed lost vision due to the injury. The court examined the medical evidence, including a statement from Dr. Stdhasen Sen, confirming the grievous nature of the injury. Concluding that the seriousness of the injury warranted continued detention, the court held that the applicant was not entitled to bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail during trial under Section 117(3) of the B.N.S. given the grievous injury (loss of vision) caused to the victim.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 117(3)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 117(3) B.N.S.
- assault
- grievous injury
- loss of vision
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13909 of 2026
Saurabh @ Gola
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brijesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the material on record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 77 of 2026, under Section 117(3) of B.N.S., P.S. Sadar Bazar,
is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due of some ulterior motive. He next submitted that in the First
Information Report general allegation against three persons, including the
applicant of assaulting the victim with kicks and fists and when the victim
somehow attempted to escape away from the place of occurrence, he was
struck on the head with a brick, resulting in an injury to his eye. He
further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the accused-
applicant. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since
12.3.2026 and has no criminal antecedents to his discredit, is entitled to
be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and
submitted that the injured has lost the vision as per the statement given by
the Doctor, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-5, page 47 to the
affidavit accompanying bail application.
5. After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the parties and perused the material brought on record including medical
BAIL No. 13909 of 2026
2
report of the injured, as well as the statement of Dr. Stdhasen Sen,
Professor & Head of Department of Opthomology, this Court finds that
"the injury caused to the injured by brick, as a result whereof he has
lost his vision" and therefore the accused-applicant is not entitled to be
enlarged on bail, hence the bail applicant is rejected.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
April 27, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…